[eiji]

The HN community is using political speech guidelines to clamp down in critique against MSM (Main Stream Media) and Silicon Valley conduct. At the same time I find political topics all the time on the front page that are deemed fine as long as they stay away from the above topics or are leaning "liberal" or "progressive".

It's been three weeks and I still can't use Instagram. They are still blocking #hashtag-recent-lists with a banner: "Recent posts from all hashtags are temporarily hidden to help prevent the spread of possible false information and harmful content related to the election." The hashtag I used to check is #handtoolwookworking. Very political indeed.

[dang]

Not sure what you mean by "The HN Community" (users? moderators? both?) but there have been countless discussions of both media and Silicon Valley here—so many that the reaction among a large segment of users here is "oh no, not that again". Meanwhile others are so eager for more more more of this that anything less than "all of it featured" counts as "suppression and censorship!"

I can't tell which side you're claiming bias in favor of or against, but both sides get pissed off when they see something from the opposite point of view and, once they've seen two or three such things, fixate on seeing HN as biased $opposite-to-me. What's ironic is how identically the battling sides mirror each other this way.

[nineplay]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25204954

This is on my front page now and is almost entirely a critique against the MSM.

[nickpp]

At the same time that article is also accusing the USA of helping mass murder of communists, two very dear "progressive" themes, so they let it pass.

[boomboomsubban]

These aren't accusations, even the US now admits their role in the massacres.

[cambalache]

That's not the point, isn't it? Of course the accusations are probably true, but what about other serious accusations about mainstream media, about mainstream democratic politicians about Y-Combinator in particular and the SV culture in general? Will they be treated with the same attention?

[eiji]

It's a political piece about regime change ops that highlights phrases like "... U.S. backed authoritarian capitalist regime ..." and "... Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program ...".

This isn't a critique piece against today's MSM. It's a piece that makes the point that the US is the evil force in the world today. You can feel that way and have arguments about that. That's fine and fair. But it's certainly not an example for critique against the MSM in the context of today and this discussion.

[BrianOnHN]

> makes the point that the US is the evil force in the world today

What made you use that choice of words? Where are you from?

[portpecos]

Probably the Title: “ How the US Used Disinformation and the ‘Jakarta Method’ to Change the World “

>The Jakarta Method is a 2020 non-fiction book by American journalist and writer Vincent Bevins. It concerns American support for the Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66.

[rootusrootus]

> political speech guidelines to clamp down in critique against MSM (Main Stream Media)

That is sensible, because the MSM label is primarily a label one side uses to describe media outlets that don't lean their ideological direction, while they ignore that there is absolutely no shortage of media outlets that do. So when you see someone using the loaded term, you know you're not reading a neutral analysis.

[wernercd]

"not shortage of outlets that do" The problem isn't that they are biased per se (That is a problem)...

The problem is that they pretend not to be biased and they are the largest players.

"Neutral analysis" Yet Twitter, Facebook, CNN, MSNBC, etc all promise they are "unbiased" while they let stories without facts run against targets on the right (IE: 'anon person says Trump said' or Covington Highschool kids)... while they sideline or suppress stories with actual backing facts that target the left (IE: "Laptop from Hell").

You call it a loaded term... we call it the largest players in the pond are "stopping election interference" by literally practicing election interference by deciding what's "true" even when it's easily proven they are wrong more often than right.

[barnesto]

Censorship is now "sensible."

MSM is a "loaded term."

What? MSM is anything but loaded. It's a description of the largest media platforms and that includes outlets like Fox News. And none of them provide "neutral analysis" hence the critiques.

Everything you said is wrong, imo. You're advocating censorship and labeling people you don't agree with. You might as well get a job in the MSM.

[gruez]

>MSM is anything but loaded. It's a description of the largest media platforms and that includes outlets like Fox News. And none of them provide "neutral analysis" hence the critiques.

Not really. You can argue that "fake news" is not loaded, because according to you it only means "news that are 100% fabricated with no basis in reality", but that still doesn't change the fact that a significant amount of people use it to refer to any news that they don't like.

[free_rms]

Multiple sides, actually.

Here's Jamaal Bowman, recently elected Democrat from Brooklyn, getting his mic cut by CNN the other night for criticizing Rahm Emmanuel:

https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1331295169417781249

[cfmcdonald]

It seems pretty clear from the video that the guy's video call dropped, it wasn't cut by CNN. CNN is reporting on these criticisms of Emanuel on their website: https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/24/politics/rahm-emanuel-transpo...

So if they are trying to secretly cover them up (as you seem to imply), they are doing a bad job.

[free_rms]

I wouldn't say it's 'clear' but you're right that it's at least ambiguous.

For a less ambiguous case, look at how CNN and MSNBC treated the Bernie campaign/movement. Calling them "MSM" doesn't mean that one is a reactionary, it just means that one is outside of their set of approved viewpoints in any direction.

[MrMan]

Does main stream media just mean fact-based, non-radicalizing, and trying to nudge sheeple towards peace and tolerance rather than violence and hate? I agree that is execrable, I think violent, bloody liberty for a few is better than peace for everyone.

[deeeeplearning]

Of course you imagine you will be the one with freedom but as a dork on HN you're much more likely to be under the boot than wearing it..